Watching the movie Back to the future it is easy to oversee that Marty McFly by playing Johnny be good in 1955 is presenting evidence of eternal life.

It’s good to contemplate and sometimes it’s good to do it together with someone else. I have a daughter, she’s the apple of my eye of course, and smart too. She’s 11 and have been watching the Back to the Future trilogy. Just like me, she is fascinated by the concept of time travel. I know that at some point or another I have read that in theory, time travel, at least back in time, should be possible, Carl Sagan I think it was. The practical application of this knowledge seems to be far in the future though. But, in theory it is possible, which is another way of saying that it is not impossible. Think about that for a minute. It is not impossible.

When watching movies like Back to the Future it is easy to enjoy the complications that occur when a person happens to meet his own parents in the past and all that comes with it without diving into existential quandaries. I can tell you that you don’t have to be an adult to appreciate the humor in the mortal awkwardness of the plot in Back to the Future in that regard.

“Who made that song?” My daughter asked me when we were discussing Marty McFly’s escapades in the 1950’s. The song of course is “Johnny Be Good” the iconic clip of Marty’s guitar solo at the school dance in 1955. Well, lets see how that went I said and then I explained how it came about according to the plot in the movie. I explained it something like this. When Marty was in 1985 he had heard the song on the radio performed by Chuck Barry, and then he had learned how to play it on his guitar. So far so good. Then when he went back in time to the year 1955 he still remembers the song and still know how to play it even though no one has made it yet. Then when he plays it at the dance Chuck Barry’s cousin Marvin calls chuck so he can hear the song, and presumably according to the plot of the movie he then records it which later is the recording that Marty listens to on the radio in 1985 when he learns how to play it. So there you have it.

Then my daughter looked at me and asked me again, “then who made the song?” This is where it gets really interesting. Not because it is weird, but because since time travel back in time is possible, this very consequence is also possible, and that will really bake your noodles when you think about it. Let me backtrack a little. The answer to my daughter’s question is staring us in the face, but somehow it’s like we don’t want to say it, suddenly we say it at the same time, “no one made it!”

Eternity

So how can it exist? In Christian mysticism there is a concept of the uncreated light. It is needless to say – a mystery. For example Serafim of Sarov is a Russian saint who was said to be surrounded by this uncreated light at any odd time, people would recount that it was impossible to look at him because he was surrounded by this incredibly bright light. It’s very interesting since he lived in modern times at the end of the 19th century. The uncreated light refers to God’s light. God is uncreated, eternal, no beginning no end. This is a problem for many. It is understandable since everything in our immediate experience has a creation and a destruction. If we need something we must make it and it always seem to break when we need it the most, that’s just how things are. The idea of something existing that has never been created and never will end is just too much to comprehend. Or is it?

Given that time travel back in time is possible and that Marty McFly’s epic guitar solo in 1955 is actually possible ay least in theory, it becomes obvious that at least something that has not been created can exist. Like in this case, Johnny Be Good, and that this song not having been created therefore also has no end – subsequently it is eternal.

Atheist generally have a hard time with the concept of eternity, the reason is simple enough, it’s because it’s too close for comfort to the concept of God. They pride themselves with leaning on science. But you only have to ask them when natural numbers (…-3, -2, -1, 0, 1, 2, 3… and so on) begin and end to make them go into cognitive shock. If you ask them to explain how something that is infinite, eternal i.e natural numbers, can fit in a universe that is supposed to be finite, which would be a little bit like being able to stuff an aircraft carrier into a toothpaste tube, they will probably start calling you names or change the subject. Atheists can not accept science if it contradicts their faith you see, they’re a bit like the medieval church like that.

Logic and science are like the two sides of the same coin. Math is applied logic. In a way that makes logic and math the language of God. Since math is based on natural numbers which transcends into the eternal reality. God has given us the tools to be able to understand eternity. The first mathematician that defined the natural numbers as infinite also presented undeniable evidence of eternity, but more than that, he also presented proof of existence without creation, that is what is really groundbreaking and revolutionary. Then many years later Marty McFly proved the same thing by playing Johnny Be Good in 1955, he proved that existence is not necessarily dependent on creation.

This is a logic deduction that in the end supports the notion of eternal life. Because logic suggests that no part of eternity can be less than eternal, how long is 1/4 of an eternity? You see? No can do.

The existence of eternity is therefore also the evidence of eternal consciousness. What people generally call eternal life, or afterlife, because our consciousness is part of that eternity, hence it can be no less than eternal in itself.

It is fascinating with parallels in nature and science. If you look carefully you can find parallels and patterns in all sorts of things, laws of physics and nature that are repeated and present in a variety of different circumstances also in society. Like fractal patterns.

One of these fundamental principles creating patterns seems to be nature’s particularly well developed aversion for imbalance. Wherever I look I can see the process of imbalance being corrected. Maybe it is all part of the Self Correcting Code of the universe (in case you never heard of Self Correcting Code, you can read about it here, it will blow your mind!). This aversion for imbalance permeate everything – in our cells it’s called osmosis, in nature it’s called weather and in the universe it’s called gravity. Wherever you find this mysterious process it has one goal, its trying to cause equilibrium where there is imbalance and in the process chaos becomes order. Equilibrium is the everlasting holy grail of the universe, it can never be achieved though, because when it does, everything will cease to exist.

No osmosis in the body means that you are dead. No winds means there is no atmosphere and the end of gravity will immediately grind the universe to a complete halt.

Universal osmosis is the constant and compulsive universal need for everything in existence to seek the ever elusive state of equilibrium. It is so manifest in our perception of reality that it is even a dominant part of our sense of aesthetics.

We like balanced things, we seek it and we want it, even though it would kill us if we would ever truly obtain it – it is a quandary. We have the capability to immediately spot when something goes against the universal and fundamental need of balance. We sometimes even find it to be repulsive. Our perception of beauty is based on our perception and compulsive need for proportions based on the golden ratio i.e. balance. Even a child will intuitively know that there is something amiss when shown a picture of something that goes against the grain of the need of balance, it is innate.

Transfer this sort of reasoning to sociology and we can paint with wide strokes about great changes in society. It’s brutally generalizing, but it doesn’t matter, because there is no individual. In this line of thinking there is only the process, a faceless, de-individualized and universally applicable process of osmosis. There are only two separate parts; imbalance and equilibrium, and all processes we observe are the manifestations of the never ending dance of the two.

In human affairs the need for balance is primarily preoccupied with gratification. Lack of gratification leads to motion, plenty of gratification leads to inactivity. Whenever burden is perceived as larger than gratification in large number of people- we have a problem. As long as gratification is perceived as equal or larger than burden, we are happy campers. Many misinterpret gratification to be money, but since we are humans and not ATM machines it is not. Gratification includes everything that makes us jump out of bed in the morning; honor, recognition, valor, love, compassion, duty, money, achievements, appreciation and on and on… that’s why happiness can be found in palaces as well as in huts.The Roman Empire collapsed because it was in want of equilibrium as it could not control its borders. The British colonial rule in America was also in want of equilibrium as evident by the revolutionary call “no taxation without representation!” or as it also can be interpreted; “no burden without gratification.”

Apply this line of thinking to the current situation in Europe. What we have in Europe is a population that until recently largely was at ease with their current level of gratification and as such prone to inactivity. Then come the large influx of other people that have a different experience. People that for generations have been casting their eyes on the riches of Europe and increasingly grown to resent the lack of gratification in their own societies as compared to the European culture. Remove efficient border controls in Europe and osmosis is doing the rest. Higher concentration of gratification in Europe is currently being deluded by the influx of people with higher concentration of burden. It is the universal law of osmosis in process. It has preceded every revolution and every coup d’etat in history and it doesn’t look good for Europe. The influx of large numbers of people that are in want of gratification from societies where violence is dominant, in combination with the dominance of pacifist ideals in a highly intellectualized Europe, is a recipe for disaster. Europe better learn quickly that intellectual relativism stands small chance against remorseless violence. If not, Europe will perish – or put differently; what good is a doctor’s degree in philosophy against a kalashnikov? To survive, Europe must not only be smart, but also need to get tough.

The existential foundation for every revolution is perceived imbalance. Because when burden is perceived as larger than gratification, things starts to happen. If the conditions for a successful revolution doesn’t exist, the antagonist, the instigator of the revolution must create the necessary conditions. The way to do that is to destabilize society, create imbalance so that equilibrium can be restored, create chaos so that order can be restored, it’s basic, it’s the “Revolution 101 for Idiots.” Create imbalance – and the universal compelling quest for equilibrium does the rest. Due to the collapse of their border controls Europe is experiencing this pre-revolutionary transformation from a state of perceived equilibrium to a state of perceived imbalance, what will follow will be chronicled in future history books.

Considering this, the current situation in Europe begs the question: Who wants the revolution and why?

Most people have probably not heard of “Doubly-even self-dual linear binary error-correcting block code” (lets just call it Self Correcting Code, SCC). Although most people intuitively knows what it proves – that there is a right and a wrong, that subjectivism is a sham.

Invented in the 1940’s (considering the circumstances it might actually be more adequate to say “discovered”) by a computer constructor to avoid mistakes when transferring data. Today it is a tool in all current internet traffic, e-mails and what not. It is a valuable tool in order to make sure that the intended message in your e-mail to a friend is actually what’s reaching your friend and not some gibberish that got messed up on the way. SCC makes perfect sense, since there is a specific purpose with the message when sending it.

Then comes a doctor in physics and expert in string theory (Dr. James Gates Jr.) and tells the world that the universe has the same thing programmed into it. This is when people go, “say what?” It turns out that the very fabric of the universe is self-correcting.

Correcting from what you might ask? Well, errors of course. Thereis obviously something that is right and something that is wrong, and apparently, the universe has an urge to make sure that “right” prevails. Accordingly to Dr Gates Jr, that would be truth. This makes sense, since TRUTH- simply put, is that which exists, and false is that which does no exist. The universe is thereby actively conducting self preserving corrections by simply favoring truth before false, since the opposite would be counter intuitive to the very fabric of existence. Think about that next time you tell a lie..

It puts a somewhat new perspective on Jesus’ statement “I am The Way, the Truth, and the Life” (John 14:6), i.e. the universe has pretty much the same rule. Truth is the fundamental building block for existence and false is not, so truth is also life and false is death, go figure…

This recent development in physics naturally is something that is sticky in a highly secularized society, especially for atheists and cynics. This is probably the reason, considering the great implications of this discovery, you don’t read about it anywhere.

I think the reason for this lack of publicity, is that it’s incredibly thorny, to try to explain the concept of a decisive right and wrong, as a fundamental existential control function in a universe completely caused by random chance. Put differently, in an atheist universe caused by chance, there is no place for SCC, since what ever chance produces is what goes. No need to correct anything. It would be antithetical to chance and randomness because when you have correcting you also have purpose and where there’s purpose there is a plan.

If there is one thing that all acquired knowledge and combined human experience is evidence of, it’s this; where there is a plan – there is also cognition, i.e. intelligence.

This actually means that expressions widely used in pop-philosophy such as “every person has a purpose, find out yours…” now is proven to be right by cutting edge physics in accordance with every tenet of modern science. Because it follows by logic, that if the universe is driven and controlled by purpose – everything in it is also driven and controlled by purpose, including our lives. Now think about that for a minute…

So there goes atheist existentialism down the drain for good. Forever exiled to history’s scrap yard of faulty theories. But this will probably not stop atheists from holding on to their beliefs (I just love how atheist claims of rationality always is subject to their cherry picking).

Even though you can’t turn back time to make a wrong right, rest assure that the universe with the help of time will set it right. It’s all very reassuring – InSelf Correcting Code we trust.

Sweden has declared that they do not intend to follow the decision by the UN panel, which is based on established international law and and the law of nation, and many of the experts on the panel are professors of law or human rights or both. One professor of law that has been partially involved and told the Guardian about severe political pressure from the UK is the Norwegian lawyer Professor Mads Andenas. UNWGAD has previously come to similar conclusions concerning Aung San Suu Kyi, the political dissenter held in arbitrary detention by the ruthless military junta of Burma, so Sweden is certainly moving up the social ladder of totalitarianism.

Naturally the Swedish media, which is state controlled, is on the band wagon. One example will have to do since it is my experience that reasonable people only have limited tolerance for utter stupidity. It has to be the Swedish Daily Dagens Nyheter (DN).

In this editorial, DN’s Ms. Hanne Kjöller is ranting incoherently about her visit to the restroom(!), ridiculing human rights law and Conventions and claiming that “UN considers it illegal to detain suspected rapists” (which of course is incorrect, but who cares right?). She also claims that Mr. Assange’s detention was voluntary. I wonder if Ms. Hanne Kjöller also considered that the Jews committed suicide during the Holocaust, since they walked by their own volition into the gas chambers? Ignorance you can cure with education, but unfortunately there is no cure for stupid. If you only have one way to turn, lest you be denied all your liberties, your actions are not the result of the exercise of free will, it is by definition the result of coercion. This is supported by an overwhelming number of civil rights cases applying international law (but apparently Ms. Hanne Kjöller has little tolerance for international human rights law).

Jews in Warsaw voluntarily entering the train to a concentration camp, according to Ms. Hanne Kjöller’s line of reasoning.

As for the accusation about rape, it is totally irrelevant in this case and as usual Swedish state media is obfuscating the issues for the public by populist hogwash. The issue in the case of Mr. Assange is Due Process a totally alien concept in Swedish jurisprudence and mindset. There’s not even a word for it in Swedish and not a single Swedish court case dealing with it. It’s actually quite remarkable. I find it ironic that Ms. Hanne Kjöller now choses to focus on the alleged accusation of rape against Mr. Assange, just weeks after it was revealed that her employer, the daily DN had been covering up the rape epidemic on girls in Stockholm. The same goes for the Wikileaks aspect of Mr. Assange’s case, it is not relevant, I don’t even agree with him on this issue, certain things should not be published. One must have the disciplin though to be able to separate different questions of law.

The prosecutor responsible for Mr. Assange’s case have been obstructing the investigation for over four years. She has refused to use any of the several legal means available to her within the framework of the European Union to finish the investigation. Mr. Assange even invited her to the embassy for interrogations with him there, in order to be able to conclude the investigation. She refused. Her only objective has been and still is to move Mr. Assange to Sweden by force. The prosecutor’s conduct is on its face a violation of Swedish criminal law, which stipulates that an investigation must be completed expediently and without unnecessary delays and inconvenience for victims and suspects. Maybe it would be time better spent if Ms. Hanne Kjöller instead would criticize the prosecutor for obstructing justice and denying the alleged victims their day in court by doing so? How come no Swedish media has this angle? As if it was a coincident, the prosecutor is conveniently abroad and unavailable to comment on the UN decision.

Although Sweden does not intend to honor the UN decision in this case, the Swedish government saw no problem in demanding that Burma would honor the UN decision in 2009, when the Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt and the entire EU demanded her release (I searched, but failed to find any cynical incoherent rantings about UN from Ms. Hanne Kjöller about this). As I understand it, Sweden means that only other countries must follow UN human rights laws, Conventions and Decisions. Apparently, they do not apply to Sweden. It seems clear to me that Sweden is a member of the UN, not to guarantee the human rights enumerated in the different UN Conventions to its own people and those unfortunately touched by the insanity of Swedish administrative arbitrariness, no sir, Sweden is a member of the UN exclusively to be able to tell other countries how to behave, and that’s what they do best.

Swedish Foreign Minister Wallström, was informed Jan. 22, 2016, about the UN decision. FM Wallström is also banned from entering Israel after claiming that “the Jews are after me.”

Sweden’s total disregard for rule of law and the comity of nations as established by the UN Charter and the Conventions is astonishing. Mr. Assange as a person that has been granted asylum by Ecuador is protected by a whole body of International Conventions that Sweden supposedly is bound by, but blatantly disregard. Even Nazi Germany respected issued diplomatic asylums, which ironically was how the Swedish diplomat and hero Raoul Wallenberg saved tens of thousands of Jews from the Nazi extermination camps. Fortunately for the Jews saved by Mr. Wallenberg, the Nazis didn’t share Ms. Hanne Kjöller’s disdain for established international law.

Here’s the lesson to be learned for the population of Sweden and the whole world. If you think that Sweden will respect your civil rights while you are in Sweden, when they refuse to do it to in other countries even when in view of the whole world, think again. If you think that Swedish media would run to your defense if your civil rights would be violated in the most fundamental way, and demand that the authorities respect international law and human rights conventions on your behalf, think again. They would much rather publicly vilify and ridicule you and your beliefs in your civil liberties.

Sweden has left the club of closet totalitarian states. It has now definitely moved to become an overtly totalitarian Potemkin State. That is state that claims to be a democracy, but will deny you every fundamental right by applying insane administrative procedures, that no one can object to or defend against, since there’s no rule of law in Sweden.

On March 13, 2016: The Indicter writes: Paid agent of Swedish security services implicated in second disinformation campaign against Assange.

I had a fascinating conversation about the universe with my 11-year old daughter Grace the other day. We were talking about the enormity of it all. I could see her eyes widen when I explained how we can’t really see how it is now, only how it was long ago, since the light only can travel so fast.

Then it hit me. What if the whole universe is gone? What if we are truly alone? We would never know.

In all discussions about the universe, whether about exoplanets, aliens, size, nature or age, we are always talking about it in the present tense. The only problem with this vantage point is that it is fundamentally incorrect. We have no idea how big it is in this instant.

The fact is, when we watch the universe, we can only see ancient history. Sure the stars closest to us are only 4-11 light years away, so they are probably still there, but the rest…

When we try to ascertain the true nature of the universe, we are always playing catch up and we will always be a couple of billion years behind the actual facts – the truth of the matter is, we will never know. To try to learn the nature of the universe is like trying to catch your own shadow.

It could all be gone for all we know. We wouldn’t find out for another couple of billion years. It is conceivable, that we actually are the only planet in the universe where there is anything going on worth mentioning. Its all due to the theory of relativity.

Bottom line is this: There exists no scientific evidence that the universe exists today! All we have is the dream about the universe. Maybe Einstein is laughing at us in his heaven?

Jesus taught: “Whoever is without sin among you, let him be the first to cast a stone at her.” (John 8:7)Jesus taught: “Whoever is without sin among you, let him be the first to cast a stone at her.” (John 8:7)

My take on the question of externalized honor and hate is that these two together makes up an explosive mix and that those who are applying them will not be able to change for the better until these two factors have been changed.

Hate is a concept that is inherently apart from reason. As a consequence reason cannot overcome hate. It is said that justice is blind, unfortunately so is hate. As a person that has been drilled in martial art techniques since early adolescence and as an ex green beret I can also with confidence say that hate is seldom a factor in a successful endeavor. A fighter that hates looses, a green beret that hates makes mistakes. Hate in itself has really no end goal other that itself and to spread it. It is almost like hate is a pathological condition that just like a virus only wants to spread its poison to others. Hate cannot build anything, only destroy and tear down and concurring with thinker/philosopher Hanna Arendt’s reasoning, violence and therefore also hate can never create power.

I have also found that hate often is combined with tendencies of megalomania. I have yet to find a person that is humble that also is seething with hate. One of the fundamental conditions for a successful dialogue is the ability to acknowledge your own responsibility in any situation. Without that ability there can never be dialogue. It is self evident that a person filled with hate and megalomaniacal tendencies is unresponsive to reason and unable to be self critical and therefore unable to participate in a dialogue based on reason. It also seems like megalomania and love are incompatible human traits.

Since hate is oblivious to reason it is also by consequence by definition irrational and its consequences usually equally irrational, such as pointless violence. Hanna Arendt has an interesting opinion which in a way supports this. Violence in itself is not irrational, according to Arendt, violence that helps you reach your goal is rational but violence that does not achieve this is irrational. Therefore it is not so strange when people look at the pointless violence in the middle east and in Gaza or the West Bank and can’t make any sense of it, because it doesn’t make any sense since it cannot create anything. It is irrational violence with no outlook to succeed in achieving the goal. It is just an expression of hate and as such it has no need to be based on reason or even make any sense. Hate is unresponsive to reason, it is therefore also by definition based on ignorance. Unfortunately ignorance can only be cured by an act of will, which is highly unlikely to take place within some one who is consumed by hate. There is hope though, and the Palestinian Mossad Hassan Yousef is a living example on how that may take place, but it requires a fundamental change of heart.

Camp David summit in 2001, Clinton and Barak suggested a two state solution, which was declined by Arafat. An act that Palestinian author Mosab Hassan Yousef, author of Son of Hamas, described as betrayal of the Palestinian people by the Palestinian leadership in order to be able to continue filling their own bank accounts with international aid money. Had the peace offer been accepted we would today have a two state solution and people would have been able to start building their lives in normalcy, but Arafat wanted differently and the result we are seeing today. Although there were no solution agreed at he Camp David summit, it teaches an important lesson and that is that peace is not impossible, it is just that it is not wanted and therefore it will not come.

The second tier, the tendency to externalize honor, endorses and strengthens hate as it legitimizes it. The consequences in society of the combination of the two are dramatic. Many have heard of “honor killings,” it is for me a concept that i very hard to understand, yet it is predominantly in the middle east a cultural fact. In Sweden the issue of honor killings, although it is acknowledged as a problem, is downplayed due to political reasons, mainly by the socialist camp in the political spectrum. Honor killing can only exist in a society where honor have been externalized, i.e. it has moved from the person to be dependant on actions of family members for instance, in such a way that their actions directly affects one and another’s honor. In western society it is generally acknowledged that honor is found within a person and is only reflected by a person’s own actions. The problem with externalized honor is that it endorses abuse and violence against anyone that is perceived to taint “your honor.” In western society, where honor to a large extent is an internalized phenomena, ones honor can only be tainted by ones own actions.

Externalized honor allows for conduct and acts without honor, such as killing of women, children, defenceless elderly, people of another faith or journalists that write disapprovingly and so on. To the contrary internalized honor promotes civil behavior and an internal need, compulsion, to act with grace towards others. In discussions about this tendency to externalize honor I have sometimes heard from cultural apologetics that it is explained as being dependent of “group think” and an evolved group mentality. I respectfully disagree. There are other societies that have group mentality but for that matter doesn’t have this kind of external honor concept. One that comes to mind is Japan, where group mentality is essential in daily life, but honor is highly personal.

The combination of hate and the externalizing of honor makes for an explosive mix. For one it eradicates the rules of engagement in normal social situations. Usually when transgressions takes place, the general tendency with people is to retaliate in kind. If some one insults you verbally, the normal conduct is to reply likewise. If the assault is physical, usually a brawl follows. It is an unwritten rule of engagement we have learned from childhood. I can remember as a child, the conversation could go something like this; “my dad is smarter than your dad” and the other kid would respond, “Oh no my dad is smarter than your dad” and so on… in adolescence the language would change but generally it would be the same pattern. When hate and externalized honor is combined these rules doesn’t apply. A verbal or other kind of non physical conduct that is perceived as an insult, may instantly be met with severe violence even lethal force. An insult of a third party, it doesn’t even have to be the aggravated party himself, is immediately met with severe violence sometimes even lethal force. This behavior is due to the combined effects, the pathological synergy of hate and externalized honor. It is in its own right the symptoms of a pathological social dysfunction and it needs to be changed.

I think that if these tendencies are left unchecked the evolution from tribal societies to modern democracies is not going to happen in the middle east. This evolution has happened before, look at the social and cultural development of Europe. It was not until the older concept of externalization of honor was replaced by internal honor that Europe where able to evolve out of the medieval chaos of constant waring fractions and build successful nation states. The concept of external honor is incompatible with things we take for granted, such as rule of law, freedom of speech, freedom of thought and religion, in other words, the idea of externalized honor is incompatible with modern western democracy. Without a change from externalized honor to internalized honor, I believe that progress in the middle east will not come and hate will not dissipate.

The founding fathers of the United States, not particularly fond of political correctness.

Political Correctness (PC) has a somewhat complicated relationship with tenets like liberty, freedom and the pursuit of happiness. It may not be obvious at first glance, but any advocate of PC is actually an adversary of these fundamental principles.

Gallilleo was placed in house arrest for speaking truth to power of the day, probably another gentleman not particularly fond of PC.

The founding fathers where rebels, they were all traitors to the British Crown and had they been caught in time by the british, they would all have been hanged.

And if you ask me I would say that PC culture was probably not a major priority for this individual either.

PC is the very antithesis of liberty. It should be self evident that when someone else tells you what you can and cannot say, he is trying to limit your freedom. Totalitarianism is dependent on silence.

Hitler on the other hand was a big fan, a huge fan of PC culture.

As is this guy.

And this.

PC culture on the other hand is not without its own accomplishments either.

The industrial extermination of Jews and political dissidents by the Nazis was overwhelmingly supported by the PC culture of the day.

At the end of the day I suppose the result, as it always is, will be the outcome of the battle of balances. In Norway the government is already preparing how to handle Sweden as a failed state due to the Swedish PC culture, read about it here.

PC culture of our present time is condoning female slavery.

Will the majority feel more compelled to protect liberty or will it be more compelled to protect PC culture? In a way we can actually already now predict how our society will become either way. Because how the future will manifest itself is really a matter of history.